Also remember that thousands of happy customers will not flock to online forums to say "OMG!!111 I just switched to Go Large and its great - thanks Xtra" So we tend to see mainly the negatives here.

Smart people who move to another plan/ISP as outlined above will pipe up, because they are intelligent enough to read Geekzone, and like to show people some positive outcomes.

I am back on Go Large, after my partner moved us off it without checking our usage first (15GB and put us on Go Express). The Go Large service is definitley degraded, and no I cant stream YouTube clips, but then I only watch about one a week anyway! Go Large suits my needs, but if it doesnt suit yours, just dont use it.

I couldnt imagine whining and complaining so hard for so long about something when there is a bunch of alternatives out there, so listen up people, simply follow the advice in the previous post, and actually fix your problems instead of working yourself up into an at-risk-of-going-postal stressball.

Grant17: Very few Go Large users who post in these forums are happy with their plan. The one notable exception seems to be Cokemaster.

In my own defense, I don't download that much and really don't use the connection as much as I used to. However when I do use it (primarily web browsing, uploading (FTP), and the odd http download), it does appear to work at an acceptable rate (Not always near the line speed). For me, it works out to be cheaper than the Adventure (10GB) plan which I was previously on and I transfer between 7-10GB a month.

I hear what you’re all saying but my augment is that xtra is specifically choosing to limit the speed of go large users. Therefore it can’tpotentiallygo "max speed". I can accept that there are number of factors, technical limitations if you like that effect the speed of data transfers (Peek busy times, p2p leechers, slow hops between international servers, etc)Xtra rate limiting or traffic management (except p2p) should not be a reason for slow http transfers on the go large plan.

Unless (and I’d like peoples opinions on this) xtra consider http as 'non sensitive' traffic and they consider 24/7 as "busy periods"- as described in the traffic management terms:

“So if you are using the Go Large plan and run peer-to-peer applications during busy periods, we may manage the peer-to-peer and other 'non sensitive' traffic to limit the congestion it causes for other users.”

And again the fair use policy dosn't come in to it. Unless you'r breaking the 700mb limit between 4pm and 12am which I'm sure the people who are compalining are not.

I really feel that xtra need to be more up front and specific about what people can expect from there go large plan. I signed up because I felt that the Fair use policy and traffic management were very reasonable. I have no problem keeping downloads to a minimum during peek times, that makes sense to me.

Either way the go large plan is the only option for me. All other plans would just be far to expensive (for me) for the amount of data I “need” to download!

And so I maintain that I’m not getting what I’m paying for.I’m certainly not getting what was advertised.

To the people who keep suggesting that we "the complaining ones" should move to another plan. Thanks for the advice; I think we get the picture! That's not really the point. If you buy a product and it doesn't meet the standards that the seller promised then it's your right to complain. I'm not hear just to bash telecom; but it's only reasonable for who want to discus the issue to do so.

Exactly my thoughts thank you for explaining this so clearly. See some of us was under the illusion that speeds would reduce and would be managed but not to the point where it has become almost equal to dialup and no where in Xtra's policys or aggreements does it say that international speeds would be as slow as watching paint dry (it fells like this when waiting for a page to load). Also I personally can't afford (and am not allowed to) change plans. So I believe that Xtra is really screwing us Go large users.

I can understand why some people may be a bit tired of the Go Large threads at this point but I think part of what keeps them going is the fact that there are people on GL who feel they've been severely cheated by xtra, and may find it exasperating that others seem to actually defend the plan (or at least overlook its glaring flaws).

Can we not agree that for quite a few people, the Go Large plan has not performed as advertised? I mean, how can anybody really argue that? I have read the fair use policy and traffic management description. The traffic management is described as limiting peer-to-peer traffic. The intent is to maintain enough bandwidth for the sort of traffic the majority of users are generating - i.e. HTTP. This seems pretty straightforward. I don't understand how that translates into strangling the bandwidth of all traffic, _including_ HTTP. So, what traffic IS being prioritized? If all of this traffic is being "managed" (flushed), does that mean there must be a great excess of bandwidth for some traffic (possibly cokemaster's ;) )?

Personally, the only reason I'm ranting about GL is because I find it slightly insane that some people seem to think the GL problems should have been expected, or else miss the point entirely and suggest changing plans or ISP's. Hell, I'm not even on Go Large. Never have been ;) .

powderedtoastman: I can understand why some people may be a bit tired of the Go Large threads at this point but I think part of what keeps them going is the fact that there are people on GL who feel they've been severely cheated by xtra, and may find it exasperating that others seem to actually defend the plan (or at least overlook its glaring flaws).

Can we not agree that for quite a few people, the Go Large plan has not performed as advertised? I mean, how can anybody really argue that?

Yes, I agree the Go Large seems to be causing ptoblems even for non-P2P traffic, but I can't say first hand since I am not even using DSL.

However there are clearly plans that cost a bit more, with a set allowance and a guarantee of no restriction on traffic type and speed. These plans cost more exactly for this.

It's a trade off (albeit not well applied it appears) that you get a bit less speed on certains applications, but get to rest assured your bill will not come with a surprise. For people with more "control" (those with no "download of copyrighted material that will nevere be watched" urge) a pro plans is better in terms of performance.

I think it's a simple thing to understand, as simple as understanding a tractor is slower but able to pull more weight than a small car that won't pull much but is faster.

Called xtra again...They tell me that it is a problem they are fully aware of and their techs are working on and that it will be resolved. They could not give me an estimate on when the problem will be resolved; days, weeks, months??? they can't tell me! I think that xtra has allocated a set amount of bandwidth to each plan. At the moment they are just not provisioning enough to go large??? maybe?